Big proposed class size increases for Title 1 and focus schools next year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you noticed everything is going to the richer schools and this is going to have a terrible impact on the rest. This is why reducing farms rates at some schools is a bad idea as its less funding.

Its often kids with special needs don't get the help they deserve. THis isn't anything new.

And, with the reduction of students at the HS level, and the reduction of staff because of that, the divide is going to be greater.

The BOE is doing this to make their schools better. Who knows where Taylor's kids go to school but he is really out of touch with what's going on outside the W schools.

I don’t think that’s fair to say “everything is going to the richer schools.” The ES class size guidelines are 28/29 for non-Focus schools and since they’re just guidelines, it’s not uncommon there are ES classes with 32 kids in them.

I’m sure if MCPS could have increased class sizes for non-Focus schools they would have. But it’s hard to fit more than 30 desks in a classroom and still be able to walk. Ask me how I know.

No, they are literally proposing improving class sizes for richer schools while worsening them for poorer schools. (So it's not a "if they could have increased class sizes for richer schools they would have" situation-- they certainly could have chosen to leave the richer schools as-is but instead are choosing to invest in bringing down class sizes there.) It's all spelled out in black and white. Schools with high FARMS rates will have higher class sizes than they do now, while schools with low FARMS rates will have lower class sizes than they do now.

I don't mean to be anti-rich schools. I do think that the class sizes at the richer schools are too big, and I think class sizes should be decreased at all the elementary schools in the county, both rich, poor, and in-between. But I also think it's just totally unacceptable to make those improvements for the richer schools on the back of the kids at the poorer schools. (Like, it would be bad enough if they only invested in improving class sizes at richer schools and left the poorer schools alone. But they are actively making things significantly worse for the youngest, poorest kids in MCPS in order to improve class sizes at the richer schools. That's just not okay.)

I am honestly shocked they are doing this at the same time as they need to be getting ready for the new requirement to hold back kids if they're not reading proficiently by 3rd grade. These class size increases in the early grades for the poorest kids are absolutely going to spike the number of kids who will have to repeat 3rd grade-- meaning MCPS needs to pay for a whole extra year of school for those kids.

[Anonymous]

We should have no more than 20 kids and a teacher with an aide in every class. That's how you get actual results and close achievement gap. We are in a focus school and going from 28 kids to 18 has been amazing for the kids. Much more engagement and learning. Everyone deserves that. Cut more central office positions and get more teachers into schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you noticed everything is going to the richer schools and this is going to have a terrible impact on the rest. This is why reducing farms rates at some schools is a bad idea as its less funding.

Its often kids with special needs don't get the help they deserve. THis isn't anything new.

And, with the reduction of students at the HS level, and the reduction of staff because of that, the divide is going to be greater.

The BOE is doing this to make their schools better. Who knows where Taylor's kids go to school but he is really out of touch with what's going on outside the W schools.

I don’t think that’s fair to say “everything is going to the richer schools.” The ES class size guidelines are 28/29 for non-Focus schools and since they’re just guidelines, it’s not uncommon there are ES classes with 32 kids in them.

I’m sure if MCPS could have increased class sizes for non-Focus schools they would have. But it’s hard to fit more than 30 desks in a classroom and still be able to walk. Ask me how I know.

No, they are literally proposing improving class sizes for richer schools while worsening them for poorer schools. (So it's not a "if they could have increased class sizes for richer schools they would have" situation-- they certainly could have chosen to leave the richer schools as-is but instead are choosing to invest in bringing down class sizes there.) It's all spelled out in black and white. Schools with high FARMS rates will have higher class sizes than they do now, while schools with low FARMS rates will have lower class sizes than they do now.

I don't mean to be anti-rich schools. I do think that the class sizes at the richer schools are too big, and I think class sizes should be decreased at all the elementary schools in the county, both rich, poor, and in-between. But I also think it's just totally unacceptable to make those improvements for the richer schools on the back of the kids at the poorer schools. (Like, it would be bad enough if they only invested in improving class sizes at richer schools and left the poorer schools alone. But they are actively making things significantly worse for the youngest, poorest kids in MCPS in order to improve class sizes at the richer schools. That's just not okay.)

But why are you pitting the focus vs. the non-focus school class sizes as if those are the two only options for budget cuts? As someone whose ES kid has 31 kids in their classroom this year, I think it's overwhelming the teacher and it's not a good environment for my kid to learn. I think that does need improvement. I also recognize that Focus schools have much smaller classes on average, but that those are needed for good reason.

MCPS could reduce choose to reduce costs in a lot of other areas...I have older kids, and would happily cut the SSL requirement (service is great, but many of the hours are earned for activities) and the staffing required is supposedly 13 people in the central office plus part of an employee's time in each MS and HS. Or the many "specialized HS programs" (aviation, ecology, social justice) of dubious quality that require so much money to develop and administer.

Getting ES class sizes right is important...other things, not so much.

I'm not the one pitting anyone against anyone... MCPS is. I think class sizes should decrease for everyone. If the proposal had been to decrease them equally for everyone, I would have happily supported it and not said a thing about equity or SES. If the proposal had been to decrease class sizes only for the richer schools and leave the poorer schools as-is, I would have grumbled a bit but ultimately been fine with it. But because the proposal is literally to make class sizes in richer schools better by simultaneously making class sizes in poorer schools worse-- in other words, that MCPS is literally actively choosing to pay for the class size reductions in the richer schools by cutting staffing and increasing class sizes in the poorer schools-- then, yeah, I'm furious, and I'm going to mention that I think it's really unfair and unwise.

[Anonymous]

I just want to highlight how ridiculous Taylor's equity claims are.

In his 400 page budget document, you have to go to page 349 (the appendix) to learn that he is increasing class sizes in focus and Title 1 schools. I don't see anywhere that he documents how much money he saves by doing this, but it is almost certainly tens of millions of dollars.

On the other hand, right up there on pages 5-6, he says "Equitable School Allocations: In the FY 2026 budget, I took a significant step to provide differentiated funding directly where our most impacted students are, and allow school leaders to determine what
will most benefit their students and their school communities by adding to the budget $2.5 million for this purpose. The FY 2027 budget recommended increase of $1.2 million for this critical need constitutes phase two of a five-year implementation to provide schools the resources needed based on the specific needs of their student population."

The total "equity add on" is about $4 million and it is spread out to ALL schools including the very wealthiest schools. So let's say three quarters is actually allocated to schools with more need - that's $3 million, which will most certainly be dwarfed by the money lost to focus and Title 1 schools.

[Anonymous]

Why everything has to be about FARMS schools? Children in other schools also need to be properly educated. My kid is in math class with 33 other students. Yes, I am all for decreasing the number of students at our school even if other schools will have to bump up a bit. I am not in a high FARMS rate school but it doesn't mean I can send my child to a private institution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just want to highlight how ridiculous Taylor's equity claims are.

In his 400 page budget document, you have to go to page 349 (the appendix) to learn that he is increasing class sizes in focus and Title 1 schools. I don't see anywhere that he documents how much money he saves by doing this, but it is almost certainly tens of millions of dollars.

On the other hand, right up there on pages 5-6, he says "Equitable School Allocations: In the FY 2026 budget, I took a significant step to provide differentiated funding directly where our most impacted students are, and allow school leaders to determine what
will most benefit their students and their school communities by adding to the budget $2.5 million for this purpose. The FY 2027 budget recommended increase of $1.2 million for this critical need constitutes phase two of a five-year implementation to provide schools the resources needed based on the specific needs of their student population."

The total "equity add on" is about $4 million and it is spread out to ALL schools including the very wealthiest schools. So let's say three quarters is actually allocated to schools with more need - that's $3 million, which will most certainly be dwarfed by the money lost to focus and Title 1 schools.

Yep, the class size changes will mean a truly massive cut to Title 1 and focus schools. Their summary says "The net change from the current staffing guidelines and the proposed staffing standards for FY 2027 result in a net decrease of 97.5 FTEs and $15.6 million," but the actual cuts to the poorer schools are actually way larger than that, because that's the savings *after* accounting for the extra cost of the smaller cost sizes at the richer schools. So they are cutting way more than $15 million from the poorer schools (probably twice or three times that or more), and then giving all but $15.6 million of that to the richer schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why everything has to be about FARMS schools? Children in other schools also need to be properly educated. My kid is in math class with 33 other students. Yes, I am all for decreasing the number of students at our school even if other schools will have to bump up a bit. I am not in a high FARMS rate school but it doesn't mean I can send my child to a private institution.

Lower income students cost more to education..that's why the state gives MCPS funding based on the number of FARMS students. But MCPS is taking that money and using it to increase resources for wealthy students. You may be okay with that (you care exclusively about your kid and kids similar to your kid) but that doesn't make it okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why everything has to be about FARMS schools? Children in other schools also need to be properly educated. My kid is in math class with 33 other students. Yes, I am all for decreasing the number of students at our school even if other schools will have to bump up a bit. I am not in a high FARMS rate school but it doesn't mean I can send my child to a private institution.

Lower income students cost more to education..that's why the state gives MCPS funding based on the number of FARMS students. But MCPS is taking that money and using it to increase resources for wealthy students. You may be okay with that (you care exclusively about your kid and kids similar to your kid) but that doesn't make it okay.

Yes,I care about my children first and foremost.
33 students in our school vs 18 in *poor* schools seem to much of a difference. That's almost doubled the classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why everything has to be about FARMS schools? Children in other schools also need to be properly educated. My kid is in math class with 33 other students. Yes, I am all for decreasing the number of students at our school even if other schools will have to bump up a bit. I am not in a high FARMS rate school but it doesn't mean I can send my child to a private institution.

Lower income students cost more to education..that's why the state gives MCPS funding based on the number of FARMS students. But MCPS is taking that money and using it to increase resources for wealthy students. You may be okay with that (you care exclusively about your kid and kids similar to your kid) but that doesn't make it okay.

Yes,I care about my children first and foremost.
33 students in our school vs 18 in *poor* schools seem to much of a difference. That's almost doubled the classroom.

18 is the minimum and you are comparing it to the largest class at your school. Gmafb. And to justify taking money meant for poor kids to use for wealthy kids. Disgusting, but not surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why everything has to be about FARMS schools? Children in other schools also need to be properly educated. My kid is in math class with 33 other students. Yes, I am all for decreasing the number of students at our school even if other schools will have to bump up a bit. I am not in a high FARMS rate school but it doesn't mean I can send my child to a private institution.

Lower income students cost more to education..that's why the state gives MCPS funding based on the number of FARMS students. But MCPS is taking that money and using it to increase resources for wealthy students. You may be okay with that (you care exclusively about your kid and kids similar to your kid) but that doesn't make it okay.

Yes,I care about my children first and foremost.
33 students in our school vs 18 in *poor* schools seem to much of a difference. That's almost doubled the classroom.

18 is the minimum and you are comparing it to the largest class at your school. Gmafb. And to justify taking money meant for poor kids to use for wealthy kids. Disgusting, but not surprising.

You do realize that most people fall somewhere between poor and wealthy. The rich and wealthy you describe are probably not even in public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why everything has to be about FARMS schools? Children in other schools also need to be properly educated. My kid is in math class with 33 other students. Yes, I am all for decreasing the number of students at our school even if other schools will have to bump up a bit. I am not in a high FARMS rate school but it doesn't mean I can send my child to a private institution.

Lower income students cost more to education..that's why the state gives MCPS funding based on the number of FARMS students. But MCPS is taking that money and using it to increase resources for wealthy students. You may be okay with that (you care exclusively about your kid and kids similar to your kid) but that doesn't make it okay.

Yes,I care about my children first and foremost.
33 students in our school vs 18 in *poor* schools seem to much of a difference. That's almost doubled the classroom.

18 is the minimum and you are comparing it to the largest class at your school. Gmafb. And to justify taking money meant for poor kids to use for wealthy kids. Disgusting, but not surprising.

You do realize that most people fall somewhere between poor and wealthy. The rich and wealthy you describe are probably not even in public schools.

Are you equating families that live in $2-3 million homes with families that receive FARMS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you noticed everything is going to the richer schools and this is going to have a terrible impact on the rest. This is why reducing farms rates at some schools is a bad idea as its less funding.

Its often kids with special needs don't get the help they deserve. THis isn't anything new.

And, with the reduction of students at the HS level, and the reduction of staff because of that, the divide is going to be greater.

The BOE is doing this to make their schools better. Who knows where Taylor's kids go to school but he is really out of touch with what's going on outside the W schools.

I don’t think that’s fair to say “everything is going to the richer schools.” The ES class size guidelines are 28/29 for non-Focus schools and since they’re just guidelines, it’s not uncommon there are ES classes with 32 kids in them.

I’m sure if MCPS could have increased class sizes for non-Focus schools they would have. But it’s hard to fit more than 30 desks in a classroom and still be able to walk. Ask me how I know.

No, they are literally proposing improving class sizes for richer schools while worsening them for poorer schools. (So it's not a "if they could have increased class sizes for richer schools they would have" situation-- they certainly could have chosen to leave the richer schools as-is but instead are choosing to invest in bringing down class sizes there.) It's all spelled out in black and white. Schools with high FARMS rates will have higher class sizes than they do now, while schools with low FARMS rates will have lower class sizes than they do now.

I don't mean to be anti-rich schools. I do think that the class sizes at the richer schools are too big, and I think class sizes should be decreased at all the elementary schools in the county, both rich, poor, and in-between. But I also think it's just totally unacceptable to make those improvements for the richer schools on the back of the kids at the poorer schools. (Like, it would be bad enough if they only invested in improving class sizes at richer schools and left the poorer schools alone. But they are actively making things significantly worse for the youngest, poorest kids in MCPS in order to improve class sizes at the richer schools. That's just not okay.)

I am honestly shocked they are doing this at the same time as they need to be getting ready for the new requirement to hold back kids if they're not reading proficiently by 3rd grade. These class size increases in the early grades for the poorest kids are absolutely going to spike the number of kids who will have to repeat 3rd grade-- meaning MCPS needs to pay for a whole extra year of school for those kids.

l

It’s not a requirement; parents can choose to have their kids move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't you noticed everything is going to the richer schools and this is going to have a terrible impact on the rest. This is why reducing farms rates at some schools is a bad idea as its less funding.

Its often kids with special needs don't get the help they deserve. THis isn't anything new.

And, with the reduction of students at the HS level, and the reduction of staff because of that, the divide is going to be greater.

The BOE is doing this to make their schools better. Who knows where Taylor's kids go to school but he is really out of touch with what's going on outside the W schools.

I don’t think that’s fair to say “everything is going to the richer schools.” The ES class size guidelines are 28/29 for non-Focus schools and since they’re just guidelines, it’s not uncommon there are ES classes with 32 kids in them.

I’m sure if MCPS could have increased class sizes for non-Focus schools they would have. But it’s hard to fit more than 30 desks in a classroom and still be able to walk. Ask me how I know.

No, they are literally proposing improving class sizes for richer schools while worsening them for poorer schools. (So it's not a "if they could have increased class sizes for richer schools they would have" situation-- they certainly could have chosen to leave the richer schools as-is but instead are choosing to invest in bringing down class sizes there.) It's all spelled out in black and white. Schools with high FARMS rates will have higher class sizes than they do now, while schools with low FARMS rates will have lower class sizes than they do now.

I don't mean to be anti-rich schools. I do think that the class sizes at the richer schools are too big, and I think class sizes should be decreased at all the elementary schools in the county, both rich, poor, and in-between. But I also think it's just totally unacceptable to make those improvements for the richer schools on the back of the kids at the poorer schools. (Like, it would be bad enough if they only invested in improving class sizes at richer schools and left the poorer schools alone. But they are actively making things significantly worse for the youngest, poorest kids in MCPS in order to improve class sizes at the richer schools. That's just not okay.)

I am honestly shocked they are doing this at the same time as they need to be getting ready for the new requirement to hold back kids if they're not reading proficiently by 3rd grade. These class size increases in the early grades for the poorest kids are absolutely going to spike the number of kids who will have to repeat 3rd grade-- meaning MCPS needs to pay for a whole extra year of school for those kids.

Holding back hurts kids in the long run. What they need to do is offer more supports during the school year and summers to get these kdis reading and have a better curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why everything has to be about FARMS schools? Children in other schools also need to be properly educated. My kid is in math class with 33 other students. Yes, I am all for decreasing the number of students at our school even if other schools will have to bump up a bit. I am not in a high FARMS rate school but it doesn't mean I can send my child to a private institution.

33 students isn't that much. We have classes with 36-38, a few more. The reason why farms is an issue is they get additional funding to pay for those smaller classes. Want that, move to a school that has higher farms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why everything has to be about FARMS schools? Children in other schools also need to be properly educated. My kid is in math class with 33 other students. Yes, I am all for decreasing the number of students at our school even if other schools will have to bump up a bit. I am not in a high FARMS rate school but it doesn't mean I can send my child to a private institution.

Lower income students cost more to education..that's why the state gives MCPS funding based on the number of FARMS students. But MCPS is taking that money and using it to increase resources for wealthy students. You may be okay with that (you care exclusively about your kid and kids similar to your kid) but that doesn't make it okay.

Yes,I care about my children first and foremost.
33 students in our school vs 18 in *poor* schools seem to much of a difference. That's almost doubled the classroom.

1) That's selfish.
2) Why can't parents work together for better things for all our kids, rather than you wanting to make things worse for poorer kids?
3) No elementary school class should have 33 kids-- even in 4th and 5th grade, they get funded for one teacher per 29 kids (although sometimes some of the classes will have 30 kids before they get extra funding, depending on how the numbers shake out.) If your principal is making classes of 33, that's your principal's decision/fault. Also, Title 1 and focus schools get one teacher per 27 kids in 4th and 5th grade so it's only a slight difference to the 29 in other schools.